From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kiszka Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Xen PV-on-HVM guest support Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:17:15 +0200 Message-ID: <4AD6CC7B.6070200@web.de> References: <1255495978.26053.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4AD5738D.8070706@web.de> <9ae48b020910141249v12154451uc515b283ccfbd47e@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig2584E35A88C797E31E4A6FA7" Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Gerd Hoffmann To: Ed Swierk Return-path: Received: from fmmailgate01.web.de ([217.72.192.221]:35097 "EHLO fmmailgate01.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751005AbZJOHVl (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:21:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <9ae48b020910141249v12154451uc515b283ccfbd47e@mail.gmail.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig2584E35A88C797E31E4A6FA7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ed Swierk wrote: > Thanks for the feedback; I'll post a new version shortly. >=20 > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:= >> Interesting stuff. How usable is your work at this point? I've no >> immediate demand, but the question if one could integrate Xen guests >> with KVM already popped up more than once @work. >=20 > So far I've managed to boot CentOS 5.3 (both i386 and x86_64) and use > the Xen PV block and net devices, with pretty good performance. I've > also booted FreeBSD 8.0-RC1 (amd64 only) with a XENHVM kernel and used > the Xen PV block and net devices, but the performance of the net > device is significantly worse than with CentOS. Also some FreeBSD > applications use a flag that's not yet implemented in the net device > emulation, but I'm working on fixing that. >=20 > Overall it seems pretty solid for Linux PV-on-HVM guests. I think more > work is needed to support full PV guests, but I don't know how much. > Have folks been asking about PV-on-HVM or full PV? Not all requests weren't that concrete /wrt technology, but some had older setups and were definitely using full PV. Jan --------------enig2584E35A88C797E31E4A6FA7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkrWzH4ACgkQitSsb3rl5xTkWgCeMaBK+vssmJW3EmCu4hdFdMtJ ctEAn3Tom6YoxcvKj5iVxJdPL4qZ6hho =KpzV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig2584E35A88C797E31E4A6FA7--